Former Oklahoma City Temple President Apostatized

[_Roger Morrison]

Antishock8, thanks for your post listing those inhuman absurdities of Judeo-Christianism. Assuming their historic fact, it reveals the barbaric hearts and minds of "God" and "his" followers through those times.

That today's so-called Christian Churches do not publicly, and repeatedly, state their disgust and dismay of their abominable history, suggests to me, their indoctrinated fear that the "God" of Abraham, Isaac & Jacob will bar them entry into heaven, and according to Nehor (earlier post) their life will have been wasted--or words to that effect.

How very sad that many folks, with little question, abide a belief system based on fables, tales and legends of our primitive inhumane past. Thinking such will lead them into another world, said to be a land of milk and honey, where peace will prevail as we (the good ones) live joyously, painlessly for eternity with family, friends and "God" walking streets of gold...
The point being???
Roger
*
*

[_antishock8]

Antishock8, thanks for your post listing those inhuman absurdities of Judeo-Christianism. Assuming their historic fact, it reveals the barbaric hearts and minds of "God" and "his" followers through those times.

That today's so-called Christian Churches do not publicly, and repeatedly, state their disgust and dismay of their abominable history, suggests to me, their indoctrinated fear that the "God" of Abraham, Isaac & Jacob will bar them entry into heaven, and according to Nehor (earlier post) their life will have been wasted--or words to that effect.

How very sad that many folks, with little question, abide a belief system based on fables, tales and legends of our primitive inhumane past. Thinking such will lead them into another world, said to be a land of milk and honey, where peace will prevail as we (the good ones) live joyously, painlessly for eternity with family, friends and "God" walking streets of gold...
The point being???
Roger
*
*

Thanks, Roger. The idea that West Coast's religion, and whatever church he attends (and refuses to name because he's a coward and doesn't want to subject it to the same criticism he levies toward the Mormon church), embraces the useful parts of the Bible, discards the unhelpful, and reinterprets the absurd in order to "make everything fit" only demonstrates to me that his ideology and his faith is just as "patently fraudulent" as he claims the Mormon ideology is.

His faith did, indeed, practice murder, ritualistic human sacrifice, rape, war, etc... And it didn't change that much with the advent of the "new testament". West Coast ridicules his own faith's book (Pauline Christianity), rejects trinitarianism (which most of the Christian world embraces), ignores what isn't convenient or practical to his own ideology... And then has the temerity to say that somehow Mormons don't have it right.

Oh. And on top of that he excreates insults showing, indeed, his faith has nothing to offer anyone that would be attractive to the human condition. His faith in Jesus doesn't make him a better person, and his wishful thinking that he'll sit in Heaven in glory while the rest of us burn in Hell for eternity is... Well.. It's the sickest thing to think about if one actually thinks about it.

---------

So. West Coast. What church do you attend?

[_why me]

Spiritual experiences are subjective. Also, perhaps they would answer as I might. Testimony I have given in the past was based on information that lacked full disclosure. As I have discovered more facts about that which I gave testimony too my testimony has needed and required modification. Apparently for the Chesney's that modification required totally abandoning what they thought was true.

I was referring to the experiences that they had both in the temple and outside the temple. If we go back 5 or 6 years, we will see two people with tears in their eyes relating the spiritual experiences that they have had. The moving of the spirit that was felt inside of them must have been strong and poweful. Such feelings should not be negated because one does not know everything about something. Those feelings were very real at that time that they were experiencing them. And then to negate them seems ashame. But then, I have no idea if they did negate them since they are basically silent about it all.

[_why me]

Because in the end, the LDS church has not been proven false. The witnesses have not been exposed and all is well in that regard.

I don't know why you would trust the word of men "too mean to mention", and who were "counterfeiters, thieves, liars, and blacklegs of the deepest dye".

Actually, guys like David Whitmer seem to be rather upright. And I am sure that many of the witnesses were good men. To read a second hand account as you have done and post it now seems just a tad farfetched. It is difficult to find a person that did not have some biasness toward Mormons both for the better and for the worse at that time.

[_why me]

..I am not sure that he is now able to deny the Holy Ghost in relation to what he felt as a member. Much better to hedge his bet and take it from there..

Why don't you elaborate on this, why me.

I think that you know how the story goes. But in case that you don't allow me to explain: All those spiritual experiences that they experienced as good members of the LDS church were classified as experiences from the Holy Ghost. What is one of the greatest sins in the LDS church? It is to deny the holy ghost and the feelings that one has had with the holy ghost as members. I am not sure if the couple want to head in that direction yet.

[_beastie]

I was referring to the experiences that they had both in the temple and outside the temple. If we go back 5 or 6 years, we will see two people with tears in their eyes relating the spiritual experiences that they have had. The moving of the spirit that was felt inside of them must have been strong and poweful. Such feelings should not be negated because one does not know everything about something. Those feelings were very real at that time that they were experiencing them. And then to negate them seems ashame. But then, I have no idea if they did negate them since they are basically silent about it all.

I don't negate my past experiences - I understand them differently. I'll use an analogy to demonstrate:

If I had grown up in a primitive culture that provided no exposure modern medicine, and watched my friends and relatives die from some bacterial infection, and then a modern doctor visited my village and gave us pills that cured the sick, I would view that as a miracle, an intervention from whatever God I believed it. This would likely result in an incredibly moving religious experience for me. Then I left the village and went to school in the modern world, and learned the science behind the medicine. Now I understand why the pills worked, and understand it had nothing to do with a god. That does not negate the experience I had, it does not deny that I experienced moving religious feelings - it just means that I now understand the event differently.

That is how I view my past spiritual feelings. I have informed myself more about the brain in general, and how the brain can be physically manipulated to produce the intense religious feelings, and now I understand that the fact that I once had very strong religious feelings does not automatically mean God exists or what I believed was "true".

It does take a certain amount of humility and lack of hubris to be willing to change your understanding of such a foundational event in one's life, and not everyone is capable of even considering that there may be an alternate explanation. Some people are so proud that they refuse to admit to themselves that there may be a different explanation for a life's experience they now hold sacred - they simply cannot admit they could be wrong about something so significant in their lives.

[_beastie]

Actually, guys like David Whitmer seem to be rather upright. And I am sure that many of the witnesses were good men. To read a second hand account as you have done and post it now seems just a tad farfetched. It is difficult to find a person that did not have some biasness toward Mormons both for the better and for the worse at that time.

You have no idea where those descriptions came from, do you? For someone who invests so much in the word of the witnesses, it seems you haven't really studied them seriously.

The "too mean to mention" was a description made by Joseph Smith, recorded in the History of the Church:

In 1838, Joseph Smith called Cowdery, Harris, and Whitmer "too mean to mention; and we had liked to have forgotten them,"[1] but in later years all three testified to the divine origin of the Book of Mormon and, at least near the end of their lives, all were members of denominations part of the Latter Day Saint movement.[2]

Source [1] - ^ B.H. Roberts, ed. History of the Church (Salt Lake City: Deseret News, 1905), 3: 232.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Mo ... ite_note-0

The blackleg comment was made by Sidney Ridgon:

After Oliver Cowdery had been taken by a State warrant for stealing, and the stolen property found ... in which nefarious transaction John Whitmer had also participated. Oliver Cowdery stole the property, conveyed it to John Whitmer ... Oliver Cowdery, David Whitmer, and Lyman E. Johnson, united with a gang of counterfeiters, thieves, liars, and blacklegs of the deepest dye, to deceive, cheat, and defraud the saints out of their property....

During the full career of Oliver Cowdery and David Whitmer's bogus money business, it got abroad into the world that they were engaged in it.... We have evidence of a very strong character that you are at this very time engaged with a gang of counterfeiters, coiners, and blacklegs,... we will put you from the county of Caldwell: so help us God

Sidney Rigdon,
1838 quotation
published in:
US Senate Document 189

http://thedigitalvoice.com/enigma/essays/rodsmn04.htm

See the full context here:

http://olivercowdery.com/smithhome/1838Sent.htm

[_Calculus Crusader]

West Coast ridicules his own faith's book (Pauline Christianity)

Do I have to resort to Dick, Jane, and Spot with you? I referred to the pseudo-Pauline epistles, i.e., those epistles written by later authors in Paul's name. I did not refer to "Pauline Christianity."

rejects trinitarianism (which most of the Christian world embraces)

So?

So. West Coast. What church do you attend?

I don't, blockhead. Do I have to spell that out for you in crayon?

[_harmony]

So. West Coast. What church do you attend?

I don't, blockhead. Do I have to spell that out for you in crayon?

CC is so smart, he doesn't need to attend a church. Churches are for people who aren't as smart as CC.

[_harmony]

Actually, guys like David Whitmer seem to be rather upright. And I am sure that many of the witnesses were good men. To read a second hand account as you have done and post it now seems just a tad farfetched. It is difficult to find a person that did not have some biasness toward Mormons both for the better and for the worse at that time.

You have no idea where those descriptions came from, do you? For someone who invests so much in the word of the witnesses, it seems you haven't really studied them seriously.

The "too mean to mention" was a description made by Joseph Smith, recorded in the History of the Church:

In 1838, Joseph Smith called Cowdery, Harris, and Whitmer "too mean to mention; and we had liked to have forgotten them,"[1] but in later years all three testified to the divine origin of the Book of Mormon and, at least near the end of their lives, all were members of denominations part of the Latter Day Saint movement.[2]

Source [1] - ^ B.H. Roberts, ed. History of the Church (Salt Lake City: Deseret News, 1905), 3: 232.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Mo ... ite_note-0

The blackleg comment was made by Sidney Ridgon:

After Oliver Cowdery had been taken by a State warrant for stealing, and the stolen property found ... in which nefarious transaction John Whitmer had also participated. Oliver Cowdery stole the property, conveyed it to John Whitmer ... Oliver Cowdery, David Whitmer, and Lyman E. Johnson, united with a gang of counterfeiters, thieves, liars, and blacklegs of the deepest dye, to deceive, cheat, and defraud the saints out of their property....

During the full career of Oliver Cowdery and David Whitmer's bogus money business, it got abroad into the world that they were engaged in it.... We have evidence of a very strong character that you are at this very time engaged with a gang of counterfeiters, coiners, and blacklegs,... we will put you from the county of Caldwell: so help us God

Sidney Rigdon,
1838 quotation
published in:
US Senate Document 189

http://thedigitalvoice.com/enigma/essays/rodsmn04.htm

See the full context here:

http://olivercowdery.com/smithhome/1838Sent.htm

Does Daniel know of these? Isn't he the one who constantly harps on how upright and trustworthy the witnesses were?